From: "Mark J. Reed" > > Also, it's not just <ch>; Zamenhof proposed > using <h> for all the circumflexes. While <ch> > for /tS/ and <sh> for /S/ are unobjectionable, > it's hard to say the same about <gh> for /dZ/, > <hh> for /x/, <jh> for /Z/. And forget <uh> > for /w/, although I think Zamenhof suggested > just using <w> for that when ŭ wasn't available. Z. recommended <u> for ŭ when ŭ wasn't available. Ph. D.